Delay Compensation external FX

Alright. Your thinking is that the delay compensation in the Ext Efx in WL and Cubase is ONLY intended for external digital gear that uses an AD/DA chip and the analog gear DOES NOT need this delay compensation process. You’ve said this many times, I know, and I hear you.

Here’s my thinking. BECAUSE Steinberg tells me that there is a bug here (because I am not able to register any delay when using analog gear in the external effects loop), I tend to think they must be correct. Flawed logic? Has it occurred to you that the delayed compensation (that Cubase overcomes as a recorded track is fed to an artist, who then records another part that is returned and aligned to the original part/track) is something unique to the overdubbing process and NOT ASSOCIATED/CONNECTED with the Ext Efx loop process? This is where I am going when Steinberg tells me there should be a measurable latency.

But I will still eventually do the test you suggest.

1 Like

There could be other uses I’m not aware with, broadcast delays, etc, etc.

Maybe Steinberg misunderstands your issue or what you are reporting to them. Maybe you reporting something as not working when it is working makes them think it is not working… etc,etc.

I don’t really get what you’re talking about here. I think you’re overthinking it. I can’t tell if you’re responding to something I said? please use quotes.

The test will tell all.

OK. That paragraph that you didn’t understand…

Q: What aspect of recording/producing music do you think a DAW would need latency compensation for? I don’t want to misquote you, but you seem to be saying that you think anything going out from the DAW and returning is compensated for if it is in the analog domain. True or False? Further, you are saying that you think the EXT EFX process in Cubase NEEDS latency compensation only when the DAW is connecting to and returning from a digital device with it’s own A/D to D/A device. True or False?

My thinking is that the EXT EFX process is independent of the latency compensation that is applied to other aspects of recording sound/music in Cubase. This is the message from Steinberg. If they thought otherwise, I’m quite positive that they would tell me this so that I would stop bugging them about the lack of support I am getting with the Motu M4. Do you understand where I’m coming from?

1 Like

I totally missed your reply about GainMatch, are you sure you installed correctly? or maybe you are referring to the other plugins that are shown in the video? I only installed GainMatch as it is the only one I was interested for the test in my case, and is running great (on Windows).

Just do the test mate. Almost everything is always compensated.

2 Likes

Nope, my Win10Cubase did not like it at all. I gave it a go a few times, that’s my limit. But I like the idea of it. There’s a more expensive one out there that does work, I just wonder if I need it as a constant use plug-in.

GexiCam, I created a different test than the one you suggested but I think it is an accurate way to see what is happening.

First off, since the Ext Efx works only on Export of the track (or section of the track), I opted to use my Manley Opto limiter to route through because it’s fairly harmless to the audio when set correctly. Next I scissor cut a two bar section of a stereo keyboard track and dropped it onto another track in the same position as the original section. I added the EXT EFX connection to this, Exported the section, and brought the results back to another track. Now I had two versions of the same section, one original and one that ran through the EXT EFX connection and the Manley. Zooming in on the two tracks, they look amazingly similar. In fact, I can’t see any difference, even in volume, but certainly not in the timing or placement of the two tracks.

OK, so next I looped the two bar phrase, Solo’d both tracks, and played them back together. They sounded great, no phase anomalies that I could hear. And then I reversed the polarity of one of them. OK, the audio was reduced about 75% but not cancelled completely. I then adjusted the gain of the original track fader from 0 to +1.45 and the two tracks cancelled themselves out. A simple volume difference.

So, I concede your findings, GexiCam. I was wrong in my assumptions here and you were right. Thank you for your persistence with me, and honestly, for all my arguments, the results make me feel a LOT better about my choice in interfaces! I don’t know why Steinberg doesn’t present this in the manual somewhere for all to appreciate? The downside now is that the M4 still doesn’t work in Wave Lab’s Ext Efx connection (like it does in Cubase) which is really unfortunate. Hopefully PG will address this. On the bright side, since I don’t have any digital outboard gear, and believing now that the ping is only necessary for use with digital gear, I can relax a bit. Thank you again, GexiCam, and Merry Christmas.

1 Like

@GexiCam I just did the test and the combination of your explanation and the test have answered all of my questions. For years I’ve been pinging my analog gear (which changed the delay) and wondered why I was hearing minor phasing issues. I thought maybe it was a bug in the software or I routed my processors incorrectly in the UR 824 software (I have 3 of them and connecting them all was hell). lol
Thank you for taking the time to thoroughly explain.

1 Like